On 14th December last year Salford, Worsley & Eccles Liberal Democrats called a public debate over the issue of an elected mayor for our city. Leader of Salford Liberal Democrats, Councillor Owen, invited Councillor Merry (leader of the council and member of the “NO” campaign) and referendum organisors Geoffrey Berg & Stephen Morris (English Democrats) of the “YES” campaign to debate the pros and cons.

On the issue of an elected mayor for Salford, locally the Liberal Democrats are firmly in the “NO” camp and have aligned ourselves with Salford Labour and support their campaign for a “NO” vote. However, Liberal Democrats were keen to see how Berg & Morris could fulfill their flagship promise of “lowering the city’s council tax by half, or more than half” – especially since we felt, if it could have been done, we would already have proposed such a cut.

Former Worsley Lib Dem Councillor Bob Boyd asked the first question and I was fortunate to ask the second question – sadly, neither were answered satisfactorily.

The debate was recorded by the English Democrats North West Secretary Val Morris, and it’s her comments you can hear at various points throughout the recording.

It was a rather long debate (indeed it was almost 40 minutes before I got to speak), but anyone who was not able to attend on the night and is still undecided about whether to vote “YES” or “NO” should most certainly watch it!

If you’re politically naive, then it’s generally not a good idea to accept a public debate challenge from two veterans of local politics – but that’s exactly what Geoffrey Berg (Salford’s elected mayor petition organiser) did last night.

I’ve written extensively on my blog about the elected mayor referendum that was forced by Mr Berg and his English Democrat sidekicks but as Salford approached the actual referendum date (and following some active letter writing for both the “YES” and “NO” campaign in the local paper), Councillor Norman Owen, leader of the Liberal Democrat group on Salford City Council challenged the “YES” camp to a public debate.

Councillor Owen was joined by leader of Salford City Council (and leader of the Salford Labour group), Councillor John Merry on the “NO” side whilst Geoffrey Berg and Stephen Morris of the English Democrats spoke for the “YES” camp, who were bizarrely directed in what to say (and who should say it) by Michael Moulding of the Community Action Party.

Whilst I have not been involved in local politics as long as Councillor’s Owen and Merry, in all my years I have never witnessed such a spectacle. Fortunate, to ask the second question, I quizzed Mr Berg on his bold claim that an elected mayor would “halve or more than halve Salford’s Council tax”. I was intruiged as to how he could promise such a saving, given that Salford has already been through several rounds of efficiency savings and staff redundancies.

What followed was embarrassing. Actually, it would have been very funny if this topic was not so serious (and costing the city hundreds of thousands of pounds it can ill afford).

Mr Berg failed, spectacularly, to answer my question – in fact, he waffled so incoherently I tried to press him to actually give me some indication of how he could halve Salford’s council tax. He couldn’t. This infuriated many members of the audience who had obviously come with an open mind about the idea of an elected mayor for Salford, and so the probing questions continued long after I had sat back down.

Many bizarre and insulting statements followed from Mr Berg and his English Democrat colleague. From direct personal attacks of Councillor Merry to a dismissal of the hard work local Councillors do in their local communities, the “YES” camp systematically offended virtually everyone in the room. Their “policies” were laughable, at one point claiming that Salford’s higher council tax hurt the poorest the hardest, yet failing to realise that the poorest tend to receive council tax benefit, meaning they don’t even pay it.

That was not the worst of it.

Asked by one audience member if they had even costed what they proposed, Mr Berg floundered, waffled and comprehensively failed to explain how he could possibly pay for any of what he was proposing. Fortunately, Councillor Owen and Councillor Merry were on hand to give Mr Berg a 101 in local council economics and with that the “YES” camp were finished.

One of the last questions asked what made Mr Berg qualified to speak about the pros and cons of an elected mayor for Salford and apparently the answer was that he had once (briefly) been a Conservative councillor in Bury. My recollection is that was the one question he actually answered.

Local Conservative party councillors, members and activists were conspicuous by their absence at the elected mayor debate last night – no doubt they wanted to distance themselves from Geoffrey Berg (who could blame them).

At 11am today, Liberal Democrat Councillor Owen will debate with Geoffrey Berg on Salford City Radio (94.4FM). If you live within the reception area, I urge you to listen in. You can also listen on-line at http://www.salfordcityradio.org/listen.php

Salford today took one step closer to the possibility of an elected Mayor on the same day Leicester City Council announced it was increasing their elected Mayor’s salary to £100,000 per year. Leicester’s Labour-controlled council also decided it would pay his Deputy Mayor £75,000 per year and his SIX “assistant Mayors” would also get a pay increase taking their salaries to £40,000 each!

Leicester elected their first directly-elected Mayor in May of this year; could that city’s voters have guessed their Mayor would get a £44,000 pay rise barely half-way through his first year in office?

At today’s full session of Salford City Council it was announced that January 2012 would be the date of Salford’s Mayoral Referendum and should that Referendum produce a “YES” vote, the election for Salford’s first directly-elected Mayor would be held in May (on the same day as the city’s local elections).

So, while a decidely bad idea for Salford – who are the front-runners for the top job in Salford should the electorate decide it wants to pay for a different kind of leader?

Despite being vehemently against a directly-elected Mayor, Salford Labour’s current leader (and leader of the Council) Councillor John Merry has already all-but thrown his hat in the ring, declaring on Twitter that he “still wanted to lead [the council]“.

Salford Conservatives seem split, but publicly they are in the “YES” camp and Boothstown & Ellenbrook Councillor Robin Garrido has been mentioned as a front-runner for the local Tories. No official candidate has been declared (nor would they be likely to declare one until after the Referendum).

As for the Liberal Democrats, we are completely against a directly-elected Mayor for Salford and so we absolutely will not select a candidate unless the Referendum produces a yes result.

I fear, however, a plethora of Independent Candidates will be tempted by the potential £100,000 salary and so it’s highly likely that a long list of Independent hopefuls will throw their hat into the ring.

Geoffrey Berg is probably the choice of the “mayoral alliance” – the main organiser of the Mayoral Petition which forced the Referendum. I’d be surprised if he relented and allowed his co-conspirators Michael Moulding (currently Community Action Party, ex-Independent, ex-Liberal Democrat) or Stephen Morris/Paul Whitelegg of the English Democrats. The English Democrat elected Mayor in Doncaster has made such a hash of his term of office, I doubt it would be good for the “mayoral alliance” campaign if they selected an English Democrat.

But what about other Independents? I fear the temptation of a huge salary coupled with likely local media interest will see the Referendum campaign turn into nothing more than a circus. How is that good for democracy or good for Salford?

There has been some debate recently regarding an elected Mayor proposal for Salford. I blogged about this here back in July.

Recent correspondence in the Salford Advertiser from the petition organisers Geoffrey Berg (a resident in Prestwich, which comes under Bury Council) and Paul Whitelegg (English Democrat party) suggests that an elected Mayor could “reduce Salford’s spending” and lower the city’s council tax. However, Paul Whitelegg agrees in his letter that the cost of the Referendum alone would be add around £1.50 to Salford’s annual council tax bill, so he is proposing I pay an extra £1.50 to fund his Referendum in my city. This flies in the face of his suggestion that an elected Mayor would be able to lower council tax bills, since the first action of any elected Mayor would have to be to raise Salford’s council tax to pay the Referendum bill!

But ignoring the cost, can the English Democrats explain why Salford would want an elected Mayor when their own Doncaster Mayor has failed miserably since he was elected in 2009?

In fact, following the government’s decision to intervene in his running of Doncaster in April of this year because of a damning Audit Commission report that city is likely to have another expensive Referendum to see if they would like to go back to more widespread representation.

In the few short years Doncaster has had an English Democrat elected Mayor, he has ignored a vote of no confidence in his leadership carried by locally elected councillors, has overseen the closure of 14 local libraries and withdrawn council funding for maintaining sports grounds which serve over a dozen former mining communities. After just two and a half years in power, his policies appear to have done nothing to improve the lives of the people of Doncaster. They will do nothing to improve the lives of Salfordians.

The English Democrats party is forcing Salford to hold a referendum on an elected Mayor for the city after they handed in a 10,000 name petition. Under the Local Government Act introduced by Labour, if 5% of the electorate petition the council and the signatures are correctly matched to names on the city’s electoral roll, a vote on the issue will be triggered automatically.

Last September at their party conference, the English Democrats launched a bid to increase the number of directly elected mayors across England, and Salford has become the first city to receive a referendum as a result of their campaign.

In a press release Robin Tilbrook, the English Democrats’ Party Chairman said “…Salford City Council was the first to achieve the necessary 5% of voters signatures to trigger a referendum under the Local Government Act 2000.”

Robin continued “All the British Establishment Parties nationally have pushed for elected Mayors to sort out the abysmal standards of both local government decision making and of democratic accountability but at the local level their councillors have usually been too busy looking after their own interests.

But why Salford? The organiser of the petition, Stephen Morris, does not live in the city and at a recent full council session, Salford’s 60 councillors voted in favour of retaining “a strong leader” and cabinet executive, so it seems clear that Salford’s democratically elected members do not share the same appetite for an elected mayor as Mr Morris and his party.

While I may count Salford’s leader, Councillor John Merry, as a political adversary – I do accept that he was elected fair and square in a local government election and that his colleagues who (by virtue of their numbers) control Salford City Council, have decided he is the man to lead them.

Councillor Merry said “[This] is not the first time English Democrats have cost us large sums of money. A mayoral election is likely to cost the people of Salford £150,000 and the organiser lives in Bury.”

If a YES vote forces Salford voters to directly elect it’s leader, rather than the members of the largest party on the council, I can only imagine how difficult running the city would be if a political opposite were to win the right to lead members of an opposing party.

Following an emphatic NO result in the AV Referendum just over a year ago, the voters of Salford have demonstrated their views and the preference is clearly to retain the status quo. I question the motives of the English Democrats, given the recent rejection by Salfordians of major changes to our electoral system.

Arnie Craven, Electoral Reform Society Council candidate added “Anything that may increase democratic engagement is to be welcomed. However the current rules surrounding directly elected Mayors unacceptably diminish the powers of local Councillors. That’s why I am calling on the Government to adjust their plans for elected Mayors in our cities, so as to ensure hard working Councillors retain their powers of scrutiny & oversight”

And given the Conservatives are considering not standing candidates in elections for the new elected police commissioners which are due to take place next May I am surprised at Tory support for elected Mayors, although in Salford perhaps it offers them a slim chance to wrestle leadership of the council from Labour control.

Nationally, the Liberal Democrats are currently calling for candidates interested in standing as Police & Crime Commissioners to undergo the parliamentary approval process, as all Lib Dem candidates will be required to be on the Party’s list of approved parliamentary candidates before being allowed to stand under the party banner.

However, no such call has gone out to local parties with regard to potential Lib Dem Mayoral candidates who may be considering standing. If Mayoral and Police Commissioner elections go ahead next year, certainly in Salford, it’s entirely possible there will be no Conservative or Liberal Democrat candidates, potentially leaving the door open for well-funded BNP or English Democrat candidates to grab power by the back door. Locally, Labour have yet to announce if they intend to put forward their own candidates to fight these elections.

Is it right that governments can be formed by a political party with three out of five voters preferring its opponents ? That’s exactly what happened, for example, in 1974 when Labour won an absolute parliamentary majority with less than forty per cent of the vote.

Our outdated "first past the post" voting system consistently produces governments that are supported by only a minority of voters.  No wonder people feel that their votes don’t count. It must be time for us to have a fair proportional voting system, as already exists in the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly.

At the last general election here’s how many votes it took to elect an MP:

Labour 27,000
Conservative 44,000
Liberal Democrat 96,000

This is why on May 5th it is perfectly possible for Labour to win more council seats than any other party and still be the biggest group on Salford City Council, in spite of its unpopularity.

Out of almost 200 worldwide countries, only around 40 use our "first past the post" voting system. Most of them being our former colonies.

Critics of proportional representation never point to the success and stability of countries like Germany, Finland, Sweden, Austria, New Zealand  and so many others who use a fair voting method and which operate on cooperation and consensus among politicians.

That’s why I’m voting Yes! to AV on Thursday 5th May.